An integrative review of human‐centered design and design thinking for the creation of health interventions
Abstract
Background In the United States, we have a healthcare system crisis with high rates of dissatisfaction among patients and providers. To transform health and healthcare, clinical providers must be proficient in the human-centered approach of design thinking (DT). Objective To synthesize the human-centered design (HCD) and DT literature for the creation of health interventions. Methods We performed an integrative literature review focused on how HCD and DT are used in the clinical healthcare setting. Four research databases were searched from inception through November 6, 2020. We analyzed the methodology used, who is using the frameworks, and the DT phases included. Results Twenty-four articles were included in the final analysis. Of the 24 manuscripts, 6 (25%) were nurse-led and 15 (63%) had interdisciplinary first and last authors (e.g., Nursing and Medicine). Overall, 10/24 (42%) included all DT method. When analyzing the articles by approach or methodology, 12 (50%) stated they were using the HCD approach, 5 (21%) the DT methodology, and 7 (29%) stated they were using both the HCD approach and DT methodology. Conclusion There are inconsistencies in who uses DT and the phases used to create healthcare interventions.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
DT is widely recognized for its human-centered and creative problem-solving methodology.
“It is widely recognized for its human-centered and creative problemsolving methodology (Leary et al., 2022;Luka, 2014).”
From A meta-analysis to explore the role of design thinking in enhancing creativity as learning outcomes in STEM education (2026) · cites this paper as Leary et al., 2022
Creativity is key to broader student learning gains, including problem-solving skills, innovation, and adaptability.
“Creativity is key to broader student learning gains, including problem-solving skills, innovation, and adaptability (Leary et al., 2022;Przybilla et al., 2018).”
From A meta-analysis to explore the role of design thinking in enhancing creativity as learning outcomes in STEM education (2026) · cites this paper as Leary et al., 2022
Cites
Galanis, P., Vraka, I., Fragkou, D., Bilali, A., & Kaitelidou, D. (2021) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/jan.14839 · Cited by 993 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Muneer, S., Santhosh, M., Parangusan, H., & Bhadra, J. (2026) · International Journal of Technology and Design Education · doi:10.1007/s10798-025-10005-2 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
- Authors
- Leary, M., Cacchione, P. Z., Demiris, G., Carthon, J. M. B., & Bauermeister, J. A.
- Affiliations
- University of Pennsylvania (US)
- School of Nursing University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia Pennsylvania USA
- Corresponding author
- Leary, Marion
- Venue
- Nursing Forum
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2022-10-18
- Volume
- 57
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1137-1152
- ISSN
- 0029-6473 (ISSN-L)
- 1744-6198
- OpenAlex
- W4306732382
- Cited by
- 43
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 2
- FWCI
- 0.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Nursing Forum (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Design Education and Practice
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Innovative Approaches in Technology and Social Development
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
- Keywords
- human-centered design, design thinking, health interventions, healthcare innovation, nurse-led intervention, interdisciplinary collaboration, health system transformation
- MeSH terms
- Delivery of Health Care, Humans, United States
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review